dump_database

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Get the complete current state,' which indicates a read operation but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, the potential size of the result, performance implications, or any side effects. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the verb itself.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very concise at two sentences, which is efficient. The phrase 'Best for comprehensive analysis' adds minimal value but is not wasteful. However, the brevity sacrifices critical information, so while it's concise, it could be restructured to include more useful details without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has an output schema but no annotations, the description should at least clarify the scope of 'complete state' (e.g., includes tasks, projects, tags) and how the boolean parameters affect output. The description is too sparse for a database dump tool that could produce large results and has filtering options. The output schema exists but is not referenced, and the description does not provide enough context for safe and effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention either parameter (hide_completed, hide_recurring_duplicates). The description fails to explain how these booleans affect the output, and the phrase 'complete current state' is actually misleading given that hide_completed defaults to true, meaning the dump is not complete by default. The description provides no added semantic value for parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the complete current state of the OmniFocus database, which is a specific verb+resource pairing. The phrase 'complete current state' and 'comprehensive analysis' help distinguish it from sibling tools like query_omnifocus, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for comprehensive analysis, giving a use case context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives like query_omnifocus for targeted queries. The guidance is implied but not explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.